Interference No. 104,320
Yamada v. Primo (Count 1)
Primo v. Yamada (Count 2)
_______________
JUDGMENT
This interference was declared on December 24, 1998, with
counts 1 and 2. As was clarified in Paper No. 22, because of
different benefit dates accorded to count 1 and count 2 , 3 4
party Primo is senior party for count 1 but junior party for
count 2, and party Yamada is senior party for count 2 but
junior party for count 1. Moreover, because of the
relationship in subject matter between counts 1 and 2, each
party has claims which correspond to both counts 1 and 2,
i.e., party Primo’s claims 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 22 and 23, and
party Yamada’s claims 1, 2 and 3. As was expressly stated on
page 42 of the Notice Declaring the Interference (Paper No.
1):
3As for count 1, Primo’s involved application
08/580,389, filed December 28, 1995, has been accorded the
benefit of application 08/376,441, filed January 23, 1995,
application 07/989,364, filed December 11, 1992, application
07/682,388, filed April 9, 1991, and EP 90200969.5, filed
April 19, 1990.
4As for count 2, Primo’s involved application
08/580,389, filed December 28, 1995, has been accorded the
benefit of application 08/376,441, filed January 23, 1995, and
application 07/989,364, filed December 11, 1992.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007